Oh good, another English dossier. Those are entertaining! One notes that at that link there are no specific accusations against Corbyn. It's all "Corbyn-supporting groups" and "concerns about Corbyn's leadership". Seems a bit thin!
We would have seen this fiction in USA too, if voters would have just forgotten that Bernie is actually Jewish.
No one said Corbyn himself was anti-Semitic - just that there was anti-Semitism within the Labour Party, and it wasn’t dealt with sufficiently during his tenure as leader.
It’s not unreasonable to hold a leader somewhat responsible - it’s not like Trump isn’t criticised (rightly) for things done by other people on his watch.
ITT, one reads "...anti-semitism in the UK Labour Party... culminated with the recent leader Corbyn..." There aren't too many ways to interpret that.
It is interesting to imagine holding the national leader of a political party responsible for her or his own actions, let alone the antics of other party members. Whatever UK has done to make this possible, we should do. Only, I suspect it will turn into yet another double standard.
I interpret to chronologically: that the rise of Corbyn to leadership of Labour revitalised some segments of supporters, some of whom had anti-Semitic views. I don’t for a second think that he personally was anti-Semitic, but some of his supporters and political allies probably are, and his prominence led to their greater prominence also.
There was a mountain of accusations of anti-semitism that boiled down to "she said something anti-zionist which we think implies she is anti-semitic if you look at it in the right light".
Meanwhile, over in actual Israel they're busy setting up an apartheid state and enacting race based policies.
It's simply not possible to be consistently anti racist without being accused of anti-semitism. Rebecca Long Bailey getting fired is simply the latest illustration of that.
> It’s not unreasonable to hold a leader somewhat responsible - it’s not like Trump isn’t criticised (rightly) for things done by other people on his watch.
Clearly you could decide that you will hold a leader to be (somewhat) responsible simply by virtue of them being the leader, as a matter of principle. However, it seems quite possible to at least _imagine_ situations where a leader is "fatally" undermined by people within their own organisation. Given that, it is worth considering whether that may have been the situation for Corbyn, and if so where culpability lies.
To complete your point, I would contend that this isn't the key issue with Trump - it isn't obvious to me that generalising over these situations is really that useful.
We would have seen this fiction in USA too, if voters would have just forgotten that Bernie is actually Jewish.